Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - Lower cost handlebar bags?

I use the Topeak 'Tour Guide'. http://www.topeak.com/products/Bags/TourGuideHandlebarBag


I strongly recommend using metal washers.



I have the exact same Topeak for randonneurring.

The velcro map pouch has proven itself and it the top lid is great for keeping the control card, etc.

One problem I found is it sat a little high for me. I re-drilled the handlebar mount holes to lower it and added two aluminum struts down the back to keep it from sagging.

This let me mount my light on the detachable computer clip, though I ty-wrapped it to keep the light steady.

I have the exact same Topeak for randonneurring.

The velcro map pouch has proven itself and it the top lid is great for keeping the control card, etc.

One problem I found is it sat a little high for me. I re-drilled the handlebar mount holes to lower it and added two aluminum struts down the back to keep it from sagging.

This let me mount my light on the detachable computer clip, though I ty-wrapped it to keep the light steady.

I'd appreciate a pic. Right now, I use the com clip for a light when I'm not using the bag. Personally, I think it's the perfect handlebar bag.

I recently got the topeak tour guide handle bar bag. My thoughts on the bag are that 1. The bag is well designed and looks very nice 2. at 5 litres has a fair bit of space for adds and sods with ample pockets. 3. Comes with a map holder.
The down side to the bag I found was the mouting system Niehter of the rings that came with mounting bracket fit my handle bar. I found that it made the bag sat too high up on my bike. The map holder was not designed for cue sheets in mind and certainly not water proof.

After doing a bunch of 200km's and a 300km ride with this bag I opted to take the bag off. I don't think this is a great randonneuring handle bar bag but certainly would make a great touring bag.

On the other side this bag is well priced at $65.00 and very nicley built.

Why do you say that? What is it lacking for the randonneur, in your mind?

Bless you. I thought we might have to meet and fight to the death. ;)

Play nice, boys!

There is a handlebar made by Nitto that ends all the hassle of brifter conflict when handlebar bags are attached: http://www.jitensha.com/eng/nittorandbar.html

The biggest problem with the bag I now have and apparently other bags I've seen is that you can't mount a headlight to the bars, and there are no bags made anymore with a bracket on the front of the bag a light can attach to. The only thing you can do is mount the light to the fork which I would rather not because I prefer the higher light angle. Any ideas how a light can be mounted?

I just noticed this! I have an ancient Rhode Gear bag, and I miraculously did not lose the attachment hardware, after using it to store derailleurs for the past 20+ years. I put it on my Trek with 40cm bars, and found that even teh Vega headlamp with it's fairly tall mount cannot see over the bag. I'll want a lower bag and possible to mount the bag and a light on a low rack. Hmmm... Need to measure the Trek bar to wheel height and see how much room there really is!

Thanks to all for this thought-provoking discussion!

Getting ready now for the 30 mile test ride ...

I'd appreciate a pic. Right now, I use the com clip for a light when I'm not using the bag. Personally, I think it's the perfect handlebar bag.


I couldn't mount the light until I raised the bracket on the bag, effectively lowering it enough to clear the light. Inside the bag is two zippers that open up to reveal the bracket and plastic demi-shell. I re-assembled the bracket with the addition of two metal strips that act as struts to keep the bag from sagging. These were drilled and sandwiched in between the two-piece bracket assembly.

The light was mounted to the computer bracket, but I found it a little shaky. If you look closely, you'll see the ty-wraps. Holds quite well, but I'd have to cut the ty-wraps if I want to remove the light.

Originally, I had the light on the Topeak bar extender, but I with the addition of the eTrex, I wanted better visibility of the GPS

Ignore the lanyard. It's for the eTrex.

Another way is to mount a piece of tube with two bolts underneath the bag and mount the light upside down. I did do this at one time, but it does make the bag heavy and you won't have a light unless you have the bag.

Many different ways to do it. Guess it's a matter of what works best for you, and how handy you are.

I think if I purchase the aluminum gun for my mig, I could make myself an all-in-one bracket that solves all my needs.

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h214/koturban/DSCF0918.jpg

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h214/koturban/DSCF0917.jpg

I couldn't mount the light until I raised the bracket on the bag, effectively lowering it enough to clear the light. Inside the bag is two zippers that open up to reveal the bracket and plastic demi-shell. I re-assembled the bracket with the addition of two metal strips that act as struts to keep the bag from sagging. These were drilled and sandwiched in between the two-piece bracket assembly.

Ah, excellent. If I ever do it, that'll be good to know.



The light was mounted to the computer bracket, but I found it a little shaky. If you look closely, you'll see the ty-wraps. Holds quite well, but I'd have to cut the ty-wraps if I want to remove the light.

Originally, I had the light on the Topeak bar extender, but I with the addition of the eTrex, I wanted better visibility of the GPS

Ignore the lanyard. It's for the eTrex.

Another way is to mount a piece of tube with two bolts underneath the bag and mount the light upside down. I did do this at one time, but it does make the bag heavy and you won't have a light unless you have the bag.

I only use the bag for certain types of rides.


Many different ways to do it. Guess it's a matter of what works best for you, and how handy you are.

I think if I purchase the aluminum gun for my mig, I could make myself an all-in-one bracket that solves all my needs.

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h214/koturban/DSCF0918.jpg

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h214/koturban/DSCF0917.jpg

Well, I did mount machine guns on the sides of a lady friends car! :thumb:

Nice compact fast looking bike. I love the saddle. Does the Powerled output match the picture on the Sigma site?

Play nice, boys!

We are being nice, mother. That was the point of the joke. :)

Ignore the lanyard.



I thought the lanyard was to fire the 5-inch gun. That is some piece of hardware!

We are being nice, mother. That was the point of the joke. :)

Ok, then, there will be peanut butter sandwiches and orange juice in the kitchen in just a little while!

Ah, excellent. If I ever do it, that'll be good to know.

Nice compact fast looking bike. I love the saddle.

Thanks. I may be returning the saddle, though. Doesn't seem to be doing it for me. My third one this year. Probably go Brooks next.


Does the Powerled output match the picture on the Sigma site?



Yeah, I'd say so. It got me home on a 300k brevet. Dyno-hubs are probably still better. If I go that route, I can always relocate this one to my helmet.

Thanks. I may be returning the saddle, though. Doesn't seem to be doing it for me. My third one this year. Probably go Brooks next.



Brooks is the way to go. I use to have a nice saddle back in the late 80's called the Avocet 2 I had for 3 years, but when it wore out I went through 13 or 14 saddles in 12 years or so looking for the holy grail of saddles. Finally tried a Brooks Swift about 7 years ago and that was and still is the holy grail of saddles. Seems to me that saddles prior to the late 80's were more comfortable, after that they came out with "brick" saddles. I have the Brooks B17 on the touring bike and it too is very comfortable.

Today's test ride was enlightening. I put between 5 and 10 # of mostly inessential stuff in my Rhode Gear bag and went out on a rural hilly ride, using my Trek 610. The ride itself was fun, about 18 miles in 1.1 hours, up a big hill (well, for Michigan), significant headwind, and a nice steep downhill. I was mainly interested in general bike handling, "flop," and anything that might be traced to inappropriate trail. Plus to get a few more hours on my B17N Imperial.

General bike handling was slowed, relative to a similar load in a saddlebag. It seemed to take more force and time to bend the bike into and out of a turn - no snappy maneuvers. The bag and the load did not whip, shift, or rattle. Loose surfaces were worse than before, the front wheel felt like it would wash out - definitely more weight on it!

This bike has had a problem with the fork wanting to turn back and forth when I climb slowly, making it hard to stay on line, and sometimes scary in traffic! This was more stable than before the bag, perhaps due to added tire friction?

I was worried about an added tendency to oscillate. I went no-hands once in a headwind, and held the bike under control for a short time. My little weight shifts were causing direction changes with overshoot and ringing, indicating a reduction in directional stability. The Trek has a trail of around 57 mm. My other candidate bike is a Woodrup, with 47 mm trail. I'll have to try it on the Woodrup and see how it goes.

I use downtube friction shifters, and I was less secure in making double shifts with one hand, as I usually did before bag.

I have a fairly long stem on this bike, 10 cm. I plan to go to a bar with a longer reach (Noodle) and a shorter stem. This will reduce the moment of inertia of the bag relative to the head axis and should improve stability and transient response.

BUT! I like having a bag right in front of me, and I like the mounting of that Topeak. Concept-wise it's one of those or an Ostrich with a Nashbar front bag support. The Rhode Gear is a decent size, but has no outside pockets. It also has no hope of water-resistance, since I can see light through the seams in the top lid. Too bad, because it was stable on teh bike and the bottom had good support - not sagged out.

B-17N Imp was decent, too. I had to raise it a few times and change the angle. We'll see how it is for the next ride, tomorrow. I may have it pointed down too much, since I'm pressing back on the bars harder than I like.

On the long downhill it was, first, fast! Coasted up to 39 mph, at which speed steering corrections sometimes seemed like they'd start a wobble or oscillation. Again, I want to see how the Woodrup behaves. It has less trail, but it's a more flexy, more cushy frame.

Just to clarify, we have been talking about the 5-liter Topeak Tour Guide bag, not the 7-liter Topeak Tour Guide DX?

Ok, then, there will be peanut butter sandwiches and orange juice in the kitchen in just a little while!

Sounds more like punishment. Got milk? :)

Just to clarify, we have been talking about the 5-liter Topeak Tour Guide bag, not the 7-liter Topeak Tour Guide DX?

Ummmm...I think so. :)

Because on tour I have front/rear panniers, I don't need any large handlebar bag. I'd never put one on my bikes , they look tooo funky.. Perfect for my race bike. Because it offers a place for my keys, wallet, small tools etc. Without being too unaerodynamic..This is adventure cycling's latest model..
6x7x3..

I just noticed this! I have an ancient Rhode Gear bag, and I miraculously did not lose the attachment hardware, after using it to store derailleurs for the past 20+ years.

Hey road Fan... I think we shopped at the same places all those years ago, Bro! Downtube shifters and H-bar bags...

Is this your Rhode Gear bag?
http://members.cox.net/netwurkin/trekbars.jpg

I bought mine back in the mid-80's and it saw regular duty on my 1984 Trek until just recently. That bag is just impossible to wear out.


Today's test ride was enlightening. I put between 5 and 10 # of mostly inessential stuff in my Rhode Gear bag and went out on a rural hilly ride... <snip> ...I was mainly interested in general bike handling, "flop," and anything that might be traced to inappropriate trail. Plus to get a few more hours on my B17N Imperial.

General bike handling was slowed, relative to a similar load in a saddlebag. It seemed to take more force and time to bend the bike into and out of a turn - no snappy maneuvers. The bag and the load did not whip, shift, or rattle. Loose surfaces were worse than before, the front wheel felt like it would wash out - definitely more weight on it!

This bike has had a problem with the fork wanting to turn back and forth when I climb slowly, making it hard to stay on line, and sometimes scary in traffic! This was more stable than before the bag, perhaps due to added tire friction?

I was worried about an added tendency to oscillate. I went no-hands once in a headwind, and held the bike under control for a short time. My little weight shifts were causing direction changes with overshoot and ringing, indicating a reduction in directional stability. The Trek has a trail of around 57 mm.

Having used the Rhode gear bag regularly on my Trek... I can say one thing. Don't do it if you want secure handling and you ride:

Fast
On bumpy roads


The mounting system on the Rhode Gear bag is extremely durable, but has dismal geometry that induces all of the worst handling characteristics that you can imagine. All of the weight of the bag is mounted very high on the bike... and all of that weight is hung on a big springy mount. At speed, that weight will start to oscillate and bounce up and down. Very disconcerting. And bumpy roads are a nightmare.

But the bag was great for commuting or slower touring because it was so bulletproof. If you want a secure and worry free bag... look elsewhere, friend.

I just replaced my Rhode gear with this:
http://members.cox.net/netwurkin/front%20edit.jpg

I never knew that the difference would be so drastic. The weight is securely supported down low by the rack/decaleur... handling is sooooo much better than with the Rhode gear.

http://members.cox.net/netwurkin/trekbars.jpg

That is a nice light setup (especially being fork-mounted). I assume you (D.I.Y.)? Are they flood or spot or both?

Hey road Fan... I think we shopped at the same places all those years ago, Bro! Downtube shifters and H-bar bags...

Is this your Rhode Gear bag?

I bought mine back in the mid-80's and it saw regular duty on my 1984 Trek until just recently. That bag is just impossible to wear out.

Having used the Rhode gear bag regularly on my Trek... I can say one thing. Don't do it if you want secure handling and you ride:

Fast
On bumpy roads


The mounting system on the Rhode Gear bag is extremely durable, but has dismal geometry that induces all of the worst handling characteristics that you can imagine. All of the weight of the bag is mounted very high on the bike... and all of that weight is hung on a big springy mount. At speed, that weight will start to oscillate and bounce up and down. Very disconcerting. And bumpy roads are a nightmare.

But the bag was great for commuting or slower touring because it was so bulletproof. If you want a secure and worry free bag... look elsewhere, friend.

I just replaced my Rhode gear with this:

I never knew that the difference would be so drastic. The weight is securely supported down low by the rack/decaleur... handling is sooooo much better than with the Rhode gear.

No, my Rhode Gear has no front pocket, and the side pockets are just little mesh pouches. I think it'll go back to its time-honored station of guarding my old derailleurs and keeping them from harm. It's proven to me the concept of how useful a front bag is, when it has a map holder.

I bought mine from the clearance bins at Performance Cycles in Denver, probably in 1986 or so.

My Trek is the 20.5 inch frame from those days, yours looks like a 23 inch. My head tube is really short.That difference probably will make it hard for me to fit a tall bag like the Ostrich. I don't see the need for that much volume at present.

I also don't have cantis on the frame. The 610 was a Sport-Tour, set up for sidepulls and 27 inch wheels. Luckily the frame takes medium brakes, so I have clearance for 28mm Conti Gators and SKS P35s. I'd need to use P-clips to attach a front low rack.

Is your fork stock? Did you consider having the rake increased to (as they say) improve handling with a front load?

Today's ride was much shorter than I hoped due to holiday weekend crowds (Leelanauw Peninsula) and unexpected road construction. Got 18 miles on the Peninsula. Bag load was about half that of the first test, and I added a bit more air (10 psi) to both tires to reduce contact. The quickness of front end response returned, as did some of the "hunting" when climbing, but the amplitude of the hunting was still much lower than pre-bag.

I think I need to first do some test rides on the Woodrup, which has 10 mm less trail, and try a shorter stem with a longer reach handlebar on teh Trek. That will pull the bag about 2 cm closer to the head axis and reduce the moment of inertia contributed by the Rhode bag.

As far as decisions, I'm going to start out with a 5-liter Topeak bag. If necessary I may modify the mount as Nestor did to make it sit closer to the front wheel. Unless I get a great birthday present and can spring for an Ostrich with decaleur and front rack.

That is a nice light setup (especially being fork-mounted). I assume you (D.I.Y.)? Are they flood or spot or both?

Yeppers... I built it myself. I used one flood and one spot... both 20W bulbs. I think they were 12 degree and 24 degree beam spreads. I ran them with a Lightbrain programmable controller and overvolted them to 14.4V with a NiMH battery.

When I run them on full power, I only get about 1 hour of runtime with a 5 AH battery... but it'll incinerate any small mammals that happen across your path!

I went to dynamo lighting mainly because of runtime. My commute forced me to charge before every ride in the winter... charge before riding to work... charge while at work for the trip home. A real pain.

Plus the new generation of LED lights really makes for lights that let you actually see where you're going. And the prices are coming down too... you no longer have to pay $300 for a good unit.

Hey Road fan! I guess I should have said that I did not like the topeak tour guide handle bar bag on my rando bike. I have seen a few people using them before and that is why I thought I would give it a shot but I was personally un-happy with how the bag performed in relation to my bike.

It also struck me a little on the small side for what I like to carry on brevets and lacked the extra hand position that I really enjoy on aero bars. I also had to do some major re-routing of cables with my STI shifters and that in itself caused enough problems to say that the bag did not work for me.

This certainly is a very high quality bag it just did not really work for me on brevets. But would be great on my touring bike/commuter bike or my wifes bike.

Sounds more like punishment. Got milk? :)



Was planning on rum.